To think Scotland has a better future than England

[hadenough]

The state of the UK today makes me utterly depressed. A Brexit voted for on the basis of lies, an anti-immigrant rhetoric, and a general attitude of unwelcome.

But yet, in Scotland, the message is very different - a focus on welcoming people to the country, an opposition to Brexit, and a real debate about the future.

It genuinely saddens me to be part of a wider country that appears intent on going back, but never forward.

no, they’re not.

the type 31s are not being built on the Clyde.

And it’s not a prison where Westminster won’t allow Scotland to leave.

Scotland does not want to leave. Can you see the difference?

If Westminster does not grant permission for indyref2 then sure it can go ahead but it’ll be completely invalid and the result will be ignored.

Well Scotland would not be negotiating for more than we are due. It should be reasonably straightforward (surely) to work out Scotland's share of UK assets etc. I expect the figures that Scotland is charged for interest on the UK's debt, for defence, for the House of Lords, for Trident renewal, for 'national expenditure' which has nothing to do with us, such as London infrastructure, are accessible by the people concerned. Then, negotiation and agreement.

Whereas in Brexit, the UK want things they can't have. They want frictionless trade with EU but won't accept the four freedoms. They aren't negotiating - TM is just saying 'make me an offer' etc. That is what I mean by saying it will be less difficult for Scotland and the UK.

Your link says that BAE can’t build the type 31s as they are at full capacity until 2030, not that the contract was taken away from them. I’m sure you said down the thread that BAE weren’t building any ships on the Clyde at all. You can’t have it both ways.

It's possible, there have been many good reasons given in this thread to think things could be better or could be worse, though I'm not sure what 'welcoming people to the country' has to do with it. Both in general views and practical applications, Scotland is little different from elsewhere in the UK when it comes to immigration. Maybe a few more Scottish politicians give lip service but there is little actually being done that would make Scotland a better place for an immigrant that I've seen. And I say that living in the council area with the most remaining UKIP councillors.

As a non-EU immigrant, I can't say Scottish rhetoric seems any more welcoming or unwelcoming than English ones for me. There is no real effort by SNP in plans or deeds that they would in any way make things better and more straightforward for migrants. Scottish councils have the same high fees for Nationality services for immigrants as English ones do - Edinburgh charges £88 to do some photocopying and check the forms are completed without any actual specialist advice, slightly more pricey than my English one does. Sure, some of them might be trying to toss residents a bone of being given the vote (a blatant political move wrapped up in feel-good-aren't-we-so-forward-thinking language if I've ever seen one), but I neither think that's really for immigrants nor do I think you can decide whether or not a country is going to have a better future entirely on one issue, particularly one that has a lot of people saying a lot of things that don't match what's going on.

Oh I see, there's no appetite for independence! Excuse me, I am sorry, I must have dreamt the 45% of voters who think it is a decent option.

And the fact that we had a vote in 2014 and lost it is not particularly relevant. How many years did it take women to get the vote? What about the referendum on the eighth amendment in Ireland? If a vote goes against you, you don't just give up and go away. If you believe your cause you keep stating your case and making the arguments. That's democracy.

They can’t build them until 2030 when the link also says the government want them by 2023. In which case why were they promised as a guarantee?

And they’re not building whole ships, or does “built at different yards and assembled in another” mean something else?

There’s also “clear and material changes” which was a caveat of the original Indy ref.

Brexit covers that, no? Given that a huge proportion of the No vote was taken in by the whopper that we would never have to deal with it.

I’m just not convinced by your arguments Nyx. Sorry if that frustrates you. I don’t believe there is any need to become independent, I’m perfectly satisfied with the level of autonomy we have now. More so given the hash the Scottish government has made of most things under it’s remit.

I also don’t believe that an independent Scotland would thrive while still keeping the standard of living (and state support) we’re used to now. Many small independent countries have quite conservative governance and high levels of austerity. Indeed, the SNP’s own growth commission warns that it wouldn’t be milk and honey, and we would be facing austerity for a decade (whatever wording they choose to use), with 25 years or so before we were doing well. This is the optimistic view. I repeat, in my view this is pointless. I like being British, and I think Scotland’s best chance of thriving is with the backing of the UK, assuming we ever get a Holyrood government willing to work with them.

@Y0uCann0tBeSer10us you don’t have to be convinced. That’s the beauty of democracy, we can talk openly and disagree without resorting to being offensive or sneering.

Youcannot - I'm not frustrated because you're not convinced. I understand you're not convinced. I don't understand how you can think Scotland can thrive within the Union when everything shows that Scotland's economy - within the union - is nowhere near what it should be.

The standard of living (and state support) we have now? The worst pensions in the developed world? Being pulled out of the EU against our will? Having our fishing bargained away for the benefit of London?

I am sorry but I genuinely don't see UK ever 'working with' Scotland for Scotland's interest. They simply can't do it. They are working on a power grab to take powers that should go to Holyrood after Brexit, so that they can impose UK wide controls on things without our consent. Westminster won't even countenance having to discuss and agree these frameworks with Scotland - how can you say they will work for Scotland's good? They will work for the good of the UK which is very much mostly NOT Scotland. That is just the way it is. Scotland has far fewer people than rUK and so Scotland's wishes - and needs! - are over-ridden by the wishes and needs of the rest of the UK. So independence is the best thing for Scotland.

So let me get this straight. Someone promises you something, they then offer it to you, you decide not to take them up on the offer and that means the promise has been broken. Riiiight

Still way more shipbuilding than had there been a no vote. It most definitely all would have gone to Portsmouth then. Although it must be imaginary shipbuilding as I’m sure you said there was none on the Clyde.

trixy away ye go, when you can manage to speak civilly (and sensibly) I’ll engage. Until then, away and aim your ridiculous tirades at someone else.

Some interesting interpretations and extreme cherry picking of facts there Nyx. I could just as easily point to the UK acting as a safety net for us so that we didn’t crash when RBS did (UK bail out) or when our income dropped with the oil prices (through the Barnet formula). In my view it is SNP mismanagement and the constant threat of independence which has damaged the Scottish economy the most. Brexit doesn’t seem to affecting the rUK as badly, and let’s not forget that if we had voted Yes in 2014 we would be out of the EU anyway. The Yes side weren’t concerned about it then, why is it a disaster now?

We’ve both been round this block enough times before for you to know that I don’t hold the same pessimistic view of the UK that you do. I don’t think we are oppressed. Westminster cannot ‘grab’ powers that Scotland didn’t hold to start with (and will likely eventually get back anyway, as long as they don’t destabilise the UK - a perfectly reasonable position to take). Obviously Scotland has a small proportion of the UK population, but so does London, or Yorkshire, or Cornwall or anywhere else, and I think that we all benefit more from being part of a larger whole. If Holyrood stopped opposing Westminster for the sake of it and actually tried to find a solution we’d all be better off.

Excuse me, where have I not been civil?

You just don’t like the fact that I have shown up the holes in your assertion that shipbuilding died a death on the Clyde after the referendum.

Trixy: theferret.scot/sturgeon-indyref-shipbuilding-promises-broken/

Is there or is there not still shipbuilding on the Clyde?

Would that shipbuilding still be happening on the Clyde today if Scotland had separated from the U.K.?

People voting for massive pie in the sky changes are looking to fix problems so entrenched and hard to fix (such as the impoverishment if the working classes due to free trade) that foolish gambles seem worth it. It’s not sensible of course. Brexit and indyref - emotional gambles.

I'm sorry both your DC didn't have an ideal situation. I, too, agree that media should not be on the curriculum.( I am currently working to reinstate media as a stand alone unit at Nat 5 level in our dept).
I'm also glad they both did very well- although I disagree with the need for a tutor - despite poor advice. I think it's a case of you got the exception not the rule.

I teach three genre at both Nat 5 and Higher, only one of which is Scottish (set text) , one is Shakespeare and the other Modern American Lit. Almost all my colleagues do the same, or similar, in other schools around Glasgow.

Agreed that tightening up is needed but that doesn't mean it's not rigorous or worthy.

Do you have an intimate knowledge of GCSE, AS and A level to compare?!

That was for rogue

Not really cherry picking Youcannot, just stating facts.

The UK acted as a safety net for us, how lovely. If we had had our own way, we would have had an oil fund which would have been a much, much more comfortable safety net. Talk about mismanagement?

If we had voted Yes and gone out of the EU, if something hadn't been worked out so that we were in a 'holding pen' arrangement - which was discussed in Brussels - I have little doubt that we would be back in by now. Our laws already align.

@trixymalixy there is partial shipbuilding, as I’ve stated numerous times. Nothing like what was promised by Better Together, and nobody knows what would or wouldn’t have happened. Much like Brexit we all went in blind and voted based on what we felt was best.

Your mocking superiority complex is, I’m afraid, not something I have either the time nor the inclination to deal with.

You haven’t responded to any of the many points I refuted with actual facts, you’re like a dog with a bone about shipbuilding. You were also partially wrong, as I was. Only one of us admitted it though eh?

You didn’t even read the whole link I sent!

As I said, chase yourself.

What resources and industries do we have? Oil is on the way out surely, won’t disassembling the old platforms in an environmentally acceptable way cost money?

They said oil was “on the way out” before 2014 (more scaremongering) and it boomed.

And saying we have nothing to offer feeds in to the narrative that we’re leeching off the Union (not true) and suits the agenda of those who hate Scotland. So which is it? Are we worth keeping? Or not?